research article effects of vegetation type and management...

Hindawi Publishing CorporationApplied and Environmental Soil ScienceVolume 2013 Article ID 624013 7 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552013624013

Research ArticleEffects of Vegetation Type and Management Practice onSoil Respiration of Grassland in Northern Japan

Minaco Adachi1 and Satoshi Tsuda2

1 Center for Global Environmental Research National Institute for Environmental Studies 16-2 Onogawa TsukubaIbaraki 305-8506 Japan

2 River Basin Research Center Gifu University 1-1 Yanagido Gifu Gifu 501-1193 Japan

Correspondence should be addressed to Minaco Adachi adachiminaconiesgojp

Received 3 July 2013 Revised 27 August 2013 Accepted 10 September 2013

Academic Editor Artemi Cerda

Copyright copy 2013 M Adachi and S Tsuda This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons AttributionLicense which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properlycited

Soil respiration rate in two types of grassland dominated with Zoysia japonica andMiscanthus sinensis respectively and under twomanagement practices (undisturbed and intentionally burned) for theM sinensis grassland was investigated for understanding theeffects of grassland vegetation type and management practices on the relationship between soil temperature and soil respiration innorthern Japan Soil temperatures at depth of 1 cm in the Z japonica (ZJ) and burnedM sinensis (MSb) plots had a larger temporalvariation than that in the controlM sinensis (MSc) plot prior to early July However the coefficient of temperature sensitivity (Q

10)

values based on soil respiration rates and soil temperatures at 5 cm depth in the ZJ and MSb plots were 13 and 29 These rateswere lower than that in the MSc plot (43) meaning that soil respiration showed lower activity to an increase in soil temperaturein the ZJ and MSb plots In addition monthly carbon fluxes from soil in these plots were smaller than that in the MSc plot Theseresults suggested that artificial disturbance would decrease soil microbial orand plant root respiration and it would contribute tothe plant productivity Future studies should examine the effects of the intensity and period of management on the soil respirationrate

1 Introduction

Temperate grasslands comprise approximately 16 of theland area in east Asia [1] In Japan because the climaxvegetation is forest most grasslands are seminatural orartificial grasslands that require intensive management suchas mowing or controlled burning [2] The area of grasslandin Japan is about 387945 ha or about 1 of the total landarea [3] The area of controlled burning in Japan is smallwith only 03 of the total land area burned betweenApril and August in 2000 a typical year [4] Seminaturaland artificial grasslands require continual management bymowing grazing or controlled burningThe vegetation typesof grasslands differ depending on the strength and frequencyof management for exampleMiscanthus sinensis dominatedareas are cut once or twice per year whereas Zoysia japonicadominated areas are cut three times per year [5]

Soil is a major carbon reserve in terrestrial ecosystemsand carbon flux from soil (soil respiration) is an important

component because of the second largest carbonflux from theecosystems In particular soil temperature would vary withchanges in management type [6 7] and it would influencesoil respiration rate For instance many studies around theworld reported that land use change management andvegetation type influenced microbial biomass and activity[8ndash15] soil respiration [16] and soil organic carbon content[17] Numerous studies have found that soil respirationincreases exponentially with increasing soil temperature invarious types of cool temperate ecosystems in Japan [18ndash24] In central Japan the annual soil respiration rate in aZ japonica grassland ranged from 719 to 1037 g C mminus2 [25]or from 1121 to 1213 g C mminus2 [23] which is larger than thatin a deciduous forest (853 gCmminus2) [20] in the same areaLikewise the maximum soil temperature at depth of 1 cmin the Z japonica grassland was over 25∘C [23 25] whereasthat in the deciduous forest was under 20∘C [20] Cao etal [26] reported that the soil-temperature-dependence of

2 Applied and Environmental Soil Science

Study site⋆

Akita

20∘

30∘

40∘

50∘

20∘

30∘

40∘

50∘120∘ 130∘ 140∘ 150∘

120∘ 130∘ 140∘ 150∘

Figure 1 Location of the study site

soil respiration varied with grazing intensity on the Tibetanplateau the soil respiration rate at the low-intensity grazingsite was greater than that at the high-intensity grazing sitethroughout the growing seasonMukhopahyay andMaiti [27]also reported that soil respiration rate at natural grassland sitewas greater than that atmowed grassland site in India in spiteof maximum soil temperature at mowed grassland site beinghigher than that at natural grassland siteTherefore intensivemanagement to maintain grassland would likely affect therelationship between soil respiration and soil temperaturehowever there is little information about the effect of artificialmanagement on soil respiration In this study we investigatedthe effects of grassland vegetation type and managementpractices on the relationship between soil temperature andsoil respiration in northern Japan The objectives of thepresent study were (1) to compare soil respiration betweentwo types of grassland (Z japonica and M sinensis) andbetween different management practices inM sinensis grass-land (undisturbed and intentionally burned) and (2) toclarify the effects of vegetation type and management onsoil environmental factors particularly soil temperature aswell as the relationships between soil respiration and soilenvironmental factors

2 Materials and Methods

21 Site Description The study was conducted in 2004 (onlyaboveground biomass ABG of ZJ plot) and 2008 at MtKanpu (39∘551015840N 139∘521015840E 355m asl Figure 1) in AkitaPrefecture northern Japan From 1981 to 2010 the annualmean temperature was 110∘C and annual mean precipitationwas 1571mm (Figure 2 Japan Meteorological Agency) Thearea has snow cover from mid-November to early April Thevegetation types and management of the three plots were asfollows (1) Z japonica grassland (ZJ) plot mowing once byAugust every year and high treading stress by humans (2)control M sinensis (MSc) plot mowing once every year butthe land was abandoned since 2001 and little treading stress(3) intentionally burned M sinensis (MSb) plot the same asthe MSc plot but it was intentionally burned in early April2008 and abandoned

Month

minus10minus5051015202530

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

PrecipitationMaximum temperatureAverage temperature

Prec

ipita

tion

(mm

)

Air

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

Minimum temperature

Figure 2 Monthly mean precipitation and monthly mean maxi-mum and minimum air temperatures at the study site from 1981 to2010 (data from Japan Meteorological Agency)

22 Measurement of Soil Respiration Soil respiration (SR)rates were measured at the three sites (ZJ MSc and MSbplots) in April May and September 2008 using an LI-6400 portable photosynthesis system (Li-Cor Lincoln NEUSA) fitted with a SR chamber (6400-09 Li-Cor) SR in theMSb plot was measured shortly after the intentional burn inApril 2008 One of 10m times 10m quadrat per one plot wasestablished and the SR rate was measured within 2m times 2msubquadrats (119899 = 25) Soil chamber was put on soil directlysoil color was not used Simultaneously soil temperature wasmeasured at each point at depths of 1 cm (ST1) and 5 cm(ST5) using a thermometer (CT-450WR Custom TokyoJapan) and soil water content was measured at 5 cm depthwith a time domain reflectometry sensor (TDR TRIME-FMIMKO Ettlingen Germany) ST1 and ST5 were continuouslymeasured at 1 h intervals at the three sites from 7 April to 8September 2008 using a Stowaway Tidbit Temperature DataLogger (Onset Computer MA USA) SR rate was regressedexponentially against ST5 as follows

SR = 119886 times exp (ST5 times 119887) (1)

where 119886 and 119887 are coefficients The coefficient of temperaturesensitivity (119876

10) values of SR was calculated as follows [28]

11987610= exp (10 times 119887) (2)

23 Plant Biomass and Soil Properties AGB of the ZJ plot wasmeasured in April 2004 (119899 = 5) and that of the MSb plotwas measured in April 2008 (119899 = 3) All of the abovegroundplants at 1m2 were taken as one sample and dried at 65∘Cduring three days and weights were measured Nine 100mLsoil samples were taken from three plots using a soil corer(height 5 cm) in May 2008 the six samples at each plotwere dried at room temperature (about 25∘C) for a weekand then soil N and C contents were measured with anNC analyzer (SumigraphNC-22 Sumika Chemical AnalysisService Tokyo Japan) Bulk density was measured from theother three soil samples using fresh and dry weight whichwere dried at 105∘C for 48 h

Applied and Environmental Soil Science 3

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

F-08 A-08 J-08 A-08 O-08Month-date

(a) ZJ (1 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(b) MSc (1 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(c) MSb (1 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(d) ZJ (5 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(e) MSc (5 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(f) MSb (5 cm depth)

Figure 3 Seasonal variation in soil temperature at 1 cm and 5 cm depths in the ZJ plot MSc plot and MSb plot in 2008 The solid black linegray line and broken line represent dailymaximummean andminimum soil temperatures respectively from early April to early SeptemberClosed circles represent mean soil temperature at each point where soil respiration rate was measured (119899 = 25)

24 Statistical Analyses All statistical analyses were con-ducted using the Aabel 3 software package (Gigawiz Ltd CoOK USA) ANOVA (Scheffersquos test) was used to determine thesignificance of differences in soil carbon and nitrogen con-tent bulk density SR rates and soil temperatures among theZJMSc andMSbplots Pearson product-moment correlationwas used to clarify the relationship between the SR rate andST1 ST5 and soil water content at depth of 5 cm

3 Results

Table 1 shows AGB and soil properties of the three plotsand soil properties were not significantly different amongthe three plots (Scheffersquos test) Differences in vegetation andmanagement greatly influenced the temporal variation in soilsurface temperature (Figure 3) In the ZJ plot the differencebetween maximum and minimum ST1 was very large duringApril and May and there were more than 10 days when thedifference was greater than 10∘C (Figure 3(a)) ST1 in theMSb plot had a larger temporal variation than that in theMSc plot prior to early July and thereafter the soil surfacetemperatures were similar in both plots (Figure 3(c)) Thetemporal variations in soil temperatures at both soil depthswere smallest in the MSc plot (Figures 3(b) and 3(e))

SR rates in April were not significantly different amongthe three plots but there were significant differences inSeptember (Table 2 Scheffersquos test 119875 lt 005) ST1 and ST5in the ZJ plot were significantly higher than those in the

other plots in September when the SR in the ZJ plot wassignificantly lower than that in the other plots In Septemberthe SR rate in the MSc plot was significantly higher thanthat in the MSb plot despite the fact that ST1 in theseplots was similar SR showed no significant correlation withsoil water content at 5 cm depth in the MSc plot (data notshown Pearson product-moment correlation 119875 = 0623)but SR in the ZJ and MSb plots had a significant negativecorrelation with soil water content at 5 cm depth (data notshown Pearson product-moment correlation 119875 lt 0001119903 = minus0483 in the ZJ plot 119875 lt 0001 119903 = minus0564 in the MSbplot) Seasonal variations in SR in the ZJ and MSb plots weresmaller than that in the MSc plot (Figure 4) The correlationcoefficients of soil temperature in the ZJ and MSb plots werelower than that in the MSc plot The correlation coefficientbetween SR and ST1 was lowest in the MSb plot because theSR rate tended to have a negative relationship with ST1 in thisplot in May (Figure 4(c) open triangles Figure 5 Pearsonproduct-moment correlation coefficient 119875 = 0021) In theMSb plot ST1 in May was higher than that in September butSR in May was much lower than that in September (Table 2)The119876

10values based on SR rate and ST5 using the coefficient

at Figures 4(d) 4(e) and 4(f)in the ZJ andMSb plot were 13and 29 whereas that in the MSc plot was 43 The estimatedsoil carbon flux from April to September was estimated as631 g Cmminus2 in the ZJ plot 13048 g C mminus2 in the MSc plotand 10023 g C mminus2 in the MSb plot (Figure 6)


0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

y = 28963e00292x

R2 = 033574P lt 0001

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

Soil temperature (∘C)

(a) ZJ (1 cm depth)

y = 27396e01868x

R2 = 068315P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)



y = 11728e00885x

R2 = 032445P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)



y = 32436e00262x

R2 = 034963

P lt 0001

AprilMaySeptember

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)


(d) ZJ (5 cm depth)

R2 = 068609

P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

AprilMaySeptember


y = 73333e01458x


y = 1097e01076x

R2 = 052628

P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

AprilMaySeptember



Figure 4 The relationships between soil temperature at 1 cm and 5 cm depths and soil respiration rate in the ZJ plot MSc plot and MSbplot The closed circle open triangle and closed triangle represent the data in April May and September 2008 respectively 119875 values werecalculated by Pearson product-moment correlation test

y = minus27788x + 12579

R2 = 021157P = 0021

0

2

4

6

8

10

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1

)

times102

Soil temperature at 1 cm depth (∘C)

Figure 5The relationship between soil respiration and soil temper-ature at depth of 1 cm in the MSb plot in May 2008

4 Discussion

The 11987610

values indicate that SR showed lower activity to anincrease in soil temperature in the ZJ and MSb plots and themonthly carbon fluxes from soil in these plots were smaller

0

100

200

300

400

ZJMScMSb

April May June July August SeptemberMon

thly

carb

on fl

ux fr

on so

il(g

C m

minus2

mon

thminus1)

Figure 6 Monthly carbon flux from soil in the ZJ plot MSc plotand MSb plot from April to September 2008

than that in the MSc plot (Figure 6) Different mechanismswere driving the weaker SR responses to increasing soiltemperature in the ZJ and MSb plots In September theSR rate was significantly lower in the ZJ plot than in theother plots although ST1 and ST5 were highest in the


Table 1 Aboveground biomass (AGB) soil carbon (C) contentsoil nitrogen (N) content and bulk density in the Zoysia japonica(ZJ) control Miscanthus sinensis (MSc) and intentionally burnedM sinensis (MSb) plots

Plot AGB(g dw mminus2)

C content ()(119899 = 6)

N content()(119899 = 6)

Bulk density(gmminus3)(119899 = 3)

ZJ 3305 plusmn 1231 1316 plusmn 113 081 plusmn 010 038 plusmn 003MSc ND 1244 plusmn 094 080 plusmn 005 033 plusmn 003

MSb 12181 plusmn 13712 1294 plusmn 062 086 plusmn 005 038 plusmn 003All data indicated mean plusmn standard deviation 1Measured in April 2004 (119899 =5) 2measured in April 2008 (119899 = 3) ND no data AGB data containedlitter biomass All soil samples were taken in May 2008 and there are notsignificant differences among the three plots (Scheffersquos test)

ZJ plot (Table 2) Schmitt et al [29] reported that plantproductivity of grassland decreased due to the reductionof leaf area index by mowing and grazing Because the ZJplot is mowed by August every year the SR in Septemberwould decrease with the decrease in plant productivity orroot respiration after mowing In the MSb plot the dailymaximum ST1 was similar to that in the ZJ plot until earlyJuly (Figures 3(a) and 3(c)) but the SR rate tended to havea negative relationship with ST1 in May (Figure 5) Thisresult is consistent with that of a study in a mixed-coniferforest [30] but positive relationships were observed in asubhumid grassland [31] and a semiarid grassland [32] In thesemiarid steppe region of southeastern Spain the SR rate alsodecreased with increasing soil temperature [33] HoweverHernandez et al [34] found that microbial biomass anddehydrogenase activity (an indicator of microbial activity) inburned soils were significantly lower than those in controlsoils Guenon et al [12] also reported that microbial biomassof the soil burned recently was significantly lower than thatof the soils burned before Therefore the relatively low SRrate under high soil temperatures in MSb as compared withother grasslands may be due to low microbial activity andormicrobial biomass resulted from the intentional burningThesoil temperature was the most important factor to estimateannual or seasonal SR rate however in some case SR hada negative relationship with soil temperature The result ofFigure 5 indicated that the estimation of SR rate using ST1would be overestimated at the MSb plot the estimated SRrate during the growth season in MSb was smaller than thatin MSc In central Africa the SR rate in burned grasslandwas significantly lower than that in a control plot 1 monthafter burning but there was no difference between the plotsat 8 months after burning [35] Moreover Schmitt et al[29] suggested that gross primary production of grasslandwas strongly affected by mowing and grazing in Europeanmountain regions Continuous investigation will be requiredin order to evaluate the period and quantity of the influenceof intensive management Ono et al [36] reported thatplant productivity and ecosystems respiration are generallyclosely coupled at paddy field of Japan Therefore our resultssuggested that artificial disturbance would decrease soilmicrobial or plant root respiration and it would contribute

Table 2 Descriptive statistics for soil respiration rates soil temper-atures at 1 cm and 5 cm depths and soil water content at depth of5 cm in the Zoysia japonica (ZJ) controlMiscanthus sinensis (MSc)and intentionally burnedM sinensis (MSb) plots

April May SeptemberSoil respiration rate (mgCO2 m

minus2 hminus1)ZJ 4266 plusmn 780a 5147 plusmn 931a 6486 plusmn 1461aMSc 3382 plusmn 2066a 4843 plusmn 1158ab 20725 plusmn 5450bMSb 3416 plusmn 2610a 5844 plusmn 1011ac 16599 plusmn 2712c

Soil temperature at depth of 1 cm (∘C)ZJ 127 plusmn 13a 207 plusmn 09a 248 plusmn 08aMSc 114 plusmn 23ab 168 plusmn 12b 219 plusmn 04bMSb 105 plusmn 13b 242 plusmn 17c 214 plusmn 04b

Soil temperature at depth of 5 cm (∘C)ZJ 94 plusmn 09a 193 plusmn 05a 231 plusmn 05aMSc 75 plusmn 08b 150 plusmn 07b 216 plusmn 03bMSb 72 plusmn 06b 198 plusmn 07a 211 plusmn 02c

Soil water content at depth of 5 cm ()ZJ 295 plusmn 37a 249 plusmn 30a NDMSc 239 plusmn 69b 218 plusmn 62a NDMSb 314 plusmn 41a 213 plusmn 44a 202 plusmn 59

Values represent means plusmn SD (119899 = 25) Different lowercase letters withinthe samemonth indicate a significant difference between plots (Scheffersquos test120572 = 001 119875 lt 005) ND no data

to the plant productivity Although defining an index ofthe intensity of management would be difficult we need tofurther investigate the effect of management intensity andduration on SR rate

According to this and previous studies the maximumAGB of Z japonica ranges from about 250 to 400 g dwmminus2 (approximately 250 g dw mminus2 [37] 297ndash413 g dw mminus2[23]) which is considerably less than that of M sinensis(769ndash837 g dw mminus2 [19] 1117 g dw mminus2 [38]) The estimatedsoil carbon flux from April to September in the ZJ plot was631 g C mminus2 This result was lower than that in Z japonicagrassland in central Japan (1077 and 1170 gCmminus2 from Mayto October in 2007 and 2008 respectively [23]) In thepresent study soil carbon flux during the growing season wasestimated as 13048 g Cmminus2 in the MSc plot and 10023 g Cmminus2 in the MSb plot In the other sites the annual CO

2flux

from the soil in an M sinensis grassland was 1387 gCmminus2in 2000 and 1480 gCmminus2 in 2001 [19] and these rates arehigher than the annual rates of soil carbon flux reported inJapanese forest ecosystems 726ndash854 g C mminus2 in deciduousforest [20] 592 gCmminus2 in secondary deciduous forest [21]and 680 gCmminus2 in the early stage of a coppice forest [24]Dhital et al [23] and Yazaki et al [19] suggested that Zjaponica and M sinensis grassland ecosystems would beequilibrium and source of CO

2 respectively therefore we

need to investigate the relationship between carbon budgetand management intensity of grassland ecosystems

5 Conclusions

Intensive management to maintain grassland would likelyaffect the carbon budget however there is little information


about the effect of artificial management on SR Thereforewe investigated SR rates in two types of grassland and dif-ferent management practices (undisturbed and intentionallyburned) to understand the effects of grassland vegetation typeand management practices in northern Japan Our resultsindicated that SR showed lower activity to an increase insoil temperature in both of the intentionally mowing andburned grassland (ZJ and MSb plots) However differentmechanisms would be driving the weaker SR responsesto increasing soil temperature in the ZJ and MSb plotsThe coefficient of temperature sensitivity (119876

10) values and

monthly carbon fluxes from soil in the intentionally mowingand burned grassland plots were also smaller than that in theundisturbed grassland plot therefore these results suggestedthat artificial disturbance would decrease soil microbial orplant root respiration and it would contribute to the plantproductivity The previous studies suggested that grasslandecosystems in Japanwould be equilibrium and source of CO

2

respectively therefore we need to investigate the relationshipbetween carbon budget and management intensity of grass-land ecosystems

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Ministry of EducationCulture Sports Science and Technology Grant-in-Aid forScientific Research (C) 22570016 The authors thank Dr YYashiro of Gifu University and Dr Y Sawada of HyogoPrefectural Awaji Landscape Planning and HorticultureAcademy for their helping investigation of the present studyand providing information on land management in the studysite

References

[1] T Oikawa and A Ito ldquoModeling carbon dynamics of terrestrialecosystem in monsoon Asiardquo in Present and Future of ModelingGlobal Environmental Change Towards Integrated Modeling TMatsuno andH Kida Eds pp 207ndash219 Terra Scientific TokyoJapan 2001

[2] M Kamada and N Nakagoshi ldquoInfluence of cultural factorson landscapes of mountainous farm villages in Western JapanrdquoLandscape and Urban Planning vol 37 no 1-2 pp 85ndash90 1997

[3] Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries ldquoReport onresults of 2005 census of Agriculture and Forestry in JapanrdquoTokyo Japan 2005

[4] K Tansey J-M Gregoire E Binaghi et al ldquoA global inventoryof burned areas at 1 km resolution for the year 2000 derivedfrom spot vegetation datardquo Climatic Change vol 67 no 2-3 pp345ndash377 2004

[5] K Asami T Hattori and H Akamatsu ldquoA study on manage-ment by cutting of the embankment vegetationrdquo The JapaneseInstitute of Landscape Architecture vol 58 no 5 pp 125ndash1281995

[6] L N Kobziar and S L Stephens ldquoThe effects of fuels treatmentson soil carbon respiration in a Sierra Nevada pine plantationrdquoAgricultural and Forest Meteorology vol 141 no 2ndash4 pp 161ndash178 2006

[7] M Bahn M Rodeghiero M Anderson-Dunn et al ldquoSoilrespiration in European grasslands in relation to climate andassimilate supplyrdquo Ecosystems vol 11 no 8 pp 1352ndash1367 2008

[8] F Garcıa-Orenes A Cerda J Mataix-Solera et al ldquoEffects ofagricultural management on surface soil properties and soil-water losses in eastern Spainrdquo Soil amp Tillage Research vol 106no 1 pp 117ndash123 2009

[9] F Garcıa-Orenes C Guerrero A Roldan et al ldquoSoil microbialbiomass and activity under different agricultural managementsystems in a semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystemrdquo Soil ampTillage Research vol 109 no 2 pp 110ndash115 2010

[10] A Fterich M Mahdhi and M Mars ldquoThe effects of Acaciatortilis subsp raddiana soil texture and soil depth on soilmicrobial and biochemical characteristics in arid zones ofTunisiardquo Land Degradation amp Development 2011

[11] A C Campos J B Etchevers K L Oleschko and C MHidahgo ldquoSoil microbial biomass and nitrogen mineralizationrates along an altitudinal gradient on the Cofre de PeroteVolcano (Mexico) the importance of landscape position andland userdquo Land Degradation amp Development 2012

[12] R Guenon M Vennetier N Dupuy S Roussos A Pailler andR Gros ldquoTrends in recovery of Mediterranean soil chemicalproperties andmicrobial activities after infrequent and frequentwildfiresrdquo Land Degradation amp Development vol 24 pp 115ndash128 2013

[13] A N Oo C B Iwai and P Saenjan ldquoSoil properties andmaize growth in saline and nonsaline soils using cassava-industrial waste compost and vermicompost with or withoutearthwormsrdquo Land Degradation amp Development 2013

[14] R L F Vasconcellos J A Bonfim D Baretta and E J BN Cardoso ldquoArbuscular mycorrahizal fungi and glomalin-related soil protein as potential indicators of soil quality in arecuperation gradient of the Atlantic forest in Brazilrdquo LandDegradation amp Development 2013

[15] J P Wu Z F Liu Y X Sun L X Zhou Y B Lin and S LFu ldquoIntroduced Eucalyptus urophylla plantations change thecomposition of the soil microbial community in subtropicalChinardquo LandDegradationampDevelopment vol 24 pp 400ndash4062013

[16] S Jaiarree A Chidthaisong N Tangtham C Polprasert ESarobol and S C Tyler ldquoCarbon budget and sequestrationpotential in a sandy soil treated with compostrdquo Land Degrada-tion amp Development 2011

[17] T B Bruun B Elberling A de Neergaard and J MagidldquoOrganic carbon dynamics in different soil types after conver-sion of forest to agriculturerdquo Land Degradation amp Development2013

[18] N Liang T Nakadai T Hirano et al ldquoIn situ comparison offour approaches to estimating soil CO

2efflux in a northern

larch (Larix kaempferi Sarg) forestrdquo Agricultural and ForestMeteorology vol 123 no 1-2 pp 97ndash117 2004

[19] Y Yazaki S Mariko and H Koizumi ldquoCarbon dynamics andbudget in a Miscanthus sinensis grassland in Japanrdquo EcologicalResearch vol 19 no 5 pp 511ndash520 2004

[20] W Mo M-S Lee M Uchida et al ldquoSeasonal and annual vari-ations in soil respiration in a cool-temperate deciduous broad-leaved forest in Japanrdquo Agricultural and Forest Meteorology vol134 pp 81ndash94 2005

[21] H Shibata T Hiura Y Tanaka K Takagi and T KoikeldquoCarbon cycling and budget in a forested basin of SouthwesternHokkaido Northern Japanrdquo Ecological Research vol 20 no 3pp 325ndash331 2005


[22] M-S Lee J-S Lee and H Koizumi ldquoTemporal variation inCO2efflux from soil and snow surfaces in a Japanese cedar

(Cryptomeria japonica) plantation central Japanrdquo EcologicalResearch vol 23 no 4 pp 777ndash785 2008

[23] D Dhital Y Yashiro T Ohtsuka H Noda Y Shizu and HKoizumi ldquoCarbon dynamics and budget in a Zoysia japonicagrassland central Japanrdquo Journal of Plant Research vol 123 no4 pp 519ndash530 2010

[24] T Ohtsuka Y Shizu A Nishiwaki Y Yashiro and H KoizumildquoCarbon cycling and net ecosystem production at an earlystage of secondary succession in an abandoned coppice forestrdquoJournal of Plant Research vol 123 no 4 pp 393ndash401 2010

[25] T Inoue and H Koizumi ldquoEffects of environmental factorsupon variation in soil respiration of a Zoysia japonica grasslandcentral Japanrdquo Ecological Research vol 27 no 2 pp 445ndash4522012

[26] G Cao Y Tang W Mo Y Wang Y Li and X Zhao ldquoGrazingintensity alters soil respiration in an alpine meadow on theTibetan plateaurdquo Soil Biology and Biochemistry vol 36 no 2pp 237ndash243 2004

[27] S Mukhopadhyay and S K Maiti ldquoSoil CO2Flux in grassland

afforested land and reclaimed coalmine overburden dumps acase studyrdquo Land Degradation amp Development 2012

[28] SHashimoto ldquoQ10values of soil respiration in Japanese forestsrdquo

Journal of Forest Research vol 10 no 5 pp 409ndash413 2005[29] M Schmitt M Bahn G Wohlfahrt U Tappeiner and A

Cernusca ldquoLand use affects the net ecosystem CO2exchange

and its components in mountain grasslandsrdquo Biogeosciencesvol 7 no 8 pp 2297ndash2309 2010

[30] S Ma J Chen M North H E Erickson M Bresee and JLe Moine ldquoShort-term effects of experimental burning andthinning on soil respiration in an old-growth mixed-coniferforestrdquoEnvironmentalManagement vol 33 no 1 pp S148ndashS1592004

[31] A K Knapp S L Conard and J M Blair ldquoDeterminants ofsoil CO

2flux from a sub-humid grassland effect of fire and fire

historyrdquo Ecological Applications vol 8 no 2 pp 760ndash770 1998[32] W Xu and S Wan ldquoWater- and plant-mediated responses of

soil respiration to topography fire and nitrogen fertilizationin a semiarid grassland in Northern Chinardquo Soil Biology andBiochemistry vol 40 no 3 pp 679ndash687 2008

[33] A Rey E Pegoraro C Oyonarte A Were P Escribano and JRaimundo ldquoImpact of land degradation on soil respiration ina steppe (Stipa tenacissima L) semi-arid ecosystem in the SE ofSpainrdquo Soil Biology and Biochemistry vol 43 no 2 pp 393ndash4032011

[34] T Hernandez C Garcıa and I Reinhardt ldquoShort-term effectof wildfire on the chemical biochemical and microbiologicalproperties of Mediterranean pine forest soilsrdquo Biology andFertility of Soils vol 25 no 2 pp 109ndash116 1997

[35] S Castaldi A de Grandcourt A Rasile U Skiba and RValentini ldquoCO

2 CH4and N

2O fluxes from soil of a burned

grassland in Central Africardquo Biogeosciences vol 7 no 11 pp3459ndash3471 2010

[36] K Ono M Mano G H Han et al ldquoEnvironmental controls onfallow carbon dioxide flux in a single-crop rice paddy JapanrdquoLand Degradation amp Development 2013

[37] T Y Ito and S Takatsuki ldquoRelationship between a high densityof sika deer and productivity of the short-grass (Zoysia japon-ica) community a case study on Kinkazan Island NorthernJapanrdquo Ecological Research vol 20 no 5 pp 573ndash579 2005

[38] S Shimoda S Murayama W Mo and T Oikawa ldquoSeasonalcontribution of C3 and C4 species to ecosystem respirationand photosynthesis estimated from isotopic measurements ofatmospheric CO

2at a grassland in Japanrdquo Agricultural and

Forest Meteorology vol 149 no 3-4 pp 603ndash613 2009

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of



EcosystemsJournal of


MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of


Marine BiologyJournal of


Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in


Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of



Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics


Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of


BiodiversityInternational Journal of


ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of


The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


ClimatologyJournal of


Study site⋆

Akita

20∘

30∘

40∘

50∘

20∘

30∘

40∘

50∘120∘ 130∘ 140∘ 150∘

120∘ 130∘ 140∘ 150∘

Figure 1 Location of the study site

soil respiration varied with grazing intensity on the Tibetanplateau the soil respiration rate at the low-intensity grazingsite was greater than that at the high-intensity grazing sitethroughout the growing seasonMukhopahyay andMaiti [27]also reported that soil respiration rate at natural grassland sitewas greater than that atmowed grassland site in India in spiteof maximum soil temperature at mowed grassland site beinghigher than that at natural grassland siteTherefore intensivemanagement to maintain grassland would likely affect therelationship between soil respiration and soil temperaturehowever there is little information about the effect of artificialmanagement on soil respiration In this study we investigatedthe effects of grassland vegetation type and managementpractices on the relationship between soil temperature andsoil respiration in northern Japan The objectives of thepresent study were (1) to compare soil respiration betweentwo types of grassland (Z japonica and M sinensis) andbetween different management practices inM sinensis grass-land (undisturbed and intentionally burned) and (2) toclarify the effects of vegetation type and management onsoil environmental factors particularly soil temperature aswell as the relationships between soil respiration and soilenvironmental factors

2 Materials and Methods

21 Site Description The study was conducted in 2004 (onlyaboveground biomass ABG of ZJ plot) and 2008 at MtKanpu (39∘551015840N 139∘521015840E 355m asl Figure 1) in AkitaPrefecture northern Japan From 1981 to 2010 the annualmean temperature was 110∘C and annual mean precipitationwas 1571mm (Figure 2 Japan Meteorological Agency) Thearea has snow cover from mid-November to early April Thevegetation types and management of the three plots were asfollows (1) Z japonica grassland (ZJ) plot mowing once byAugust every year and high treading stress by humans (2)control M sinensis (MSc) plot mowing once every year butthe land was abandoned since 2001 and little treading stress(3) intentionally burned M sinensis (MSb) plot the same asthe MSc plot but it was intentionally burned in early April2008 and abandoned

Month

minus10minus5051015202530

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

PrecipitationMaximum temperatureAverage temperature

Prec

ipita

tion

(mm

)

Air

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

Minimum temperature

Figure 2 Monthly mean precipitation and monthly mean maxi-mum and minimum air temperatures at the study site from 1981 to2010 (data from Japan Meteorological Agency)

22 Measurement of Soil Respiration Soil respiration (SR)rates were measured at the three sites (ZJ MSc and MSbplots) in April May and September 2008 using an LI-6400 portable photosynthesis system (Li-Cor Lincoln NEUSA) fitted with a SR chamber (6400-09 Li-Cor) SR in theMSb plot was measured shortly after the intentional burn inApril 2008 One of 10m times 10m quadrat per one plot wasestablished and the SR rate was measured within 2m times 2msubquadrats (119899 = 25) Soil chamber was put on soil directlysoil color was not used Simultaneously soil temperature wasmeasured at each point at depths of 1 cm (ST1) and 5 cm(ST5) using a thermometer (CT-450WR Custom TokyoJapan) and soil water content was measured at 5 cm depthwith a time domain reflectometry sensor (TDR TRIME-FMIMKO Ettlingen Germany) ST1 and ST5 were continuouslymeasured at 1 h intervals at the three sites from 7 April to 8September 2008 using a Stowaway Tidbit Temperature DataLogger (Onset Computer MA USA) SR rate was regressedexponentially against ST5 as follows

SR = 119886 times exp (ST5 times 119887) (1)

where 119886 and 119887 are coefficients The coefficient of temperaturesensitivity (119876

10) values of SR was calculated as follows [28]

11987610= exp (10 times 119887) (2)

23 Plant Biomass and Soil Properties AGB of the ZJ plot wasmeasured in April 2004 (119899 = 5) and that of the MSb plotwas measured in April 2008 (119899 = 3) All of the abovegroundplants at 1m2 were taken as one sample and dried at 65∘Cduring three days and weights were measured Nine 100mLsoil samples were taken from three plots using a soil corer(height 5 cm) in May 2008 the six samples at each plotwere dried at room temperature (about 25∘C) for a weekand then soil N and C contents were measured with anNC analyzer (SumigraphNC-22 Sumika Chemical AnalysisService Tokyo Japan) Bulk density was measured from theother three soil samples using fresh and dry weight whichwere dried at 105∘C for 48 h


Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(a) ZJ (1 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(d) ZJ (5 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35





3 Results







0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

y = 28963e00292x

R2 = 033574P lt 0001

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)


(a) ZJ (1 cm depth)

y = 27396e01868x

R2 = 068315P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)



y = 11728e00885x

R2 = 032445P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)



y = 32436e00262x

R2 = 034963

P lt 0001

AprilMaySeptember

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)


(d) ZJ (5 cm depth)

R2 = 068609

P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

AprilMaySeptember


y = 73333e01458x


y = 1097e01076x

R2 = 052628

P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

AprilMaySeptember




y = minus27788x + 12579

R2 = 021157P = 0021

0

2

4

6

8

10

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1

)

times102



4 Discussion

The 11987610


0

100

200

300

400

ZJMScMSb


thly

carb

on fl

ux fr

on so

il(g

C m

minus2

mon

thminus1)






C content ()(119899 = 6)

N content()(119899 = 6)














2flux




5 Conclusions




10) values and


2


Acknowledgments


References













































2 CH4and N












Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics















Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(a) ZJ (1 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


(d) ZJ (5 cm depth)

Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Soil

tem

pera

ture

(∘C)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35





3 Results







0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

y = 28963e00292x

R2 = 033574P lt 0001

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)


(a) ZJ (1 cm depth)

y = 27396e01868x

R2 = 068315P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)



y = 11728e00885x

R2 = 032445P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)



y = 32436e00262x

R2 = 034963

P lt 0001

AprilMaySeptember

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)


(d) ZJ (5 cm depth)

R2 = 068609

P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

AprilMaySeptember


y = 73333e01458x


y = 1097e01076x

R2 = 052628

P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

AprilMaySeptember




y = minus27788x + 12579

R2 = 021157P = 0021

0

2

4

6

8

10

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1

)

times102



4 Discussion

The 11987610


0

100

200

300

400

ZJMScMSb


thly

carb

on fl

ux fr

on so

il(g

C m

minus2

mon

thminus1)






C content ()(119899 = 6)

N content()(119899 = 6)














2flux




5 Conclusions




10) values and


2


Acknowledgments


References













































2 CH4and N












Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics















0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

y = 28963e00292x

R2 = 033574P lt 0001

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)


(a) ZJ (1 cm depth)

y = 27396e01868x

R2 = 068315P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)



y = 11728e00885x

R2 = 032445P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)



y = 32436e00262x

R2 = 034963

P lt 0001

AprilMaySeptember

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)


(d) ZJ (5 cm depth)

R2 = 068609

P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

AprilMaySeptember


y = 73333e01458x


y = 1097e01076x

R2 = 052628

P lt 0001

0 5 10 15 20 25 3005

101520253035times102

Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1)

AprilMaySeptember




y = minus27788x + 12579

R2 = 021157P = 0021

0

2

4

6

8

10

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30Soil

resp

iratio

n ra

te (m

g CO

2m

minus2

hminus1

)

times102



4 Discussion

The 11987610


0

100

200

300

400

ZJMScMSb


thly

carb

on fl

ux fr

on so

il(g

C m

minus2

mon

thminus1)






C content ()(119899 = 6)

N content()(119899 = 6)














2flux




5 Conclusions




10) values and


2


Acknowledgments


References













































2 CH4and N












Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics

















C content ()(119899 = 6)

N content()(119899 = 6)














2flux




5 Conclusions




10) values and


2


Acknowledgments


References













































2 CH4and N












Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics
















10) values and


2


Acknowledgments


References













































2 CH4and N












Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics



































2 CH4and N












Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics


















Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics














research article effects of vegetation type and management...

Documents